Evening Republican, Volume 16, Number 240, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 7 October 1912 — THE TARIFF. [ARTICLE]

THE TARIFF.

Four years ago, after an agitation lasting several years prior to that date, the republican platform promised a .revision of, the tariff. Everyone understood this to mean a downward revision. And they so understood it because every party newspaper and political speaker said the tariff plank meant a “downward revision.” Mr. Taft in his speech at the George Ade rally, in answer to a question put to him by one in the audience, as to what he understood the proposed revision to mean, said with considerable emphasis in substance as follows: “I understand the revision of the tariff means revision downward.” We took him at his word and we elected him by a plurality of two million votes. Congress convened in special session to revise the tariff. It was evident from the beginning that the leaders of the party did not mean to keep faith with the people. Many members of Congress made a consistent fight to redeem the party pledge, but when the thne came to vote, many fell in line, lay reason of the party lash and the desire to be regular, and voted for the thing against which they had contended. Representative Crumpacker was one of these. Albert J. Beveridge and about twenty other Progressive senators refused to support the tariff bill. In other words Beveridge voted as he fought Crumpacker voted at the other fellow fought. During all this tariff legislation, not once did President Taft raiae hia hand La defense of his promise to the people. He was completely swallowed up by the standpatters. Suppose he had said to Mr. Aldrich and his kind: “Gentlemen, unless you enact a tariff law in accordance with the plank in the republican platform, I will appeal to the people and the force of public opinion will compel you to keep your -promise,” and as a last resort he would have said, “If you don’t keep your promise I will veto your bill." But he lacked the courage of his convictions; he permitted himself to be surrounded as Senator Dolliver has well said, “by men who know what they want and how .to get it” But even had that been all, the voters might yet have excused Mr. Taft; but instead of keeping still after a poor performance, he went about the country abusing those of the republican party who voted against the tariff bill and read them out of the party, at the same time pronouncing the Payne-Aldrich tariff law the best tariff law ever enacted. Being chided by several newspapers for failure to keep the party pledge, he said in a speech in the east, that the platform did not promise a “downward revision.” And so it did not; but Mr. Taft did and the voters who put him In power understood it as a “downward revision.” The first election following the enactment of the payne-Aldrich bill, swept into power a Democratic house, leaving Indiana with one lone member, Mr. Crumpacker, whose.majority has steadily declined from about 8,000 of fifteen years ago to 1,800 In the last election. The entire country went Democratic. Then we had an exhibition of tariff grabbing, the like of which, even the old standpatters, snch as Cannon and Aldrich, had never seen. The democratic members at once showed that there was no hope from them as to a fair revision of the tariff. Mr. Underwood became the very acme of standpatism and Mr. Bryan severely denounced his attitude. Bat Mr. Underwood had a

strong following and nothing was accomplished of importance. But you are asking, what will the Progressives do in regard to the tariff if placed in power? Every Progressive member of Congress fought for a just and fair revision of the tariff. They did not hesitate; they had the courage of their convictions and voted as they talked, and they are the only ones who did. So we have reason for our faith, that if placed in power, they will enact a tariff law In accordance with the party promise. And what is the promise? It is this: A protective tariff, based upon the difference fn cost of labor at home and abroad; all of which is to be determined by an impartial investigation by men of high qualifications, acting as a “tariff commission,” with full power to fix rates and change the same as conditions may justify. In other words the Progressive party proposes to go about the matter in a business-like manner, get the facts first and then act accordingly; and not use the tariff as a “horse-trading” proposition, against the interest' of the masses of the people. In this way only can the tariff be taken out of politics and made a matter of business. This the old parties will oppose, because they fight their mock battles over the tariff question, campaign after campaign, trying to make the people believe that it is the one great issue that confronts us.